The cancer had just been revealed to have come back. He said he was outlining plans for doing other work even though he couldn't do full reviewing. He even said something about how he'll just be living out a dream of reviewing only the films he wanted to review.

I think he kind of knew what was coming. He was outlining it in his own unique way and was making sure plans were in place to continue his legacy, but it sounds like he knew.

That kind of dedication to what you do ... solemn respect, out of me at least.

His book "I Hated Hated Hated This Movie" is one of the funniest, truest, greatest bathroom reading books in the history of...books of that...nature. Ebert Victorious still the best Onion headline of all time. So long.

DemonEater:That was quick, we just had the "Ebert cuts his workload" article about his cancer returning yesterday.

When my grandfather's cancer came back, they gave him chemo on Wednesday, moved him to hospice on Thursday and he passed away the following Tuesday. They really thought when they checked him into the oncology unit on Wednesday that they were just going to keep him until he got through the worst of the round of chemo they gave him. When they got into the details, it was way worse than they had previously expected. The only reason he was given more than the normal "comfort" care was because one of his daughters (my mom's stepsister) was out of state and needed to arrange travel.

I feel bad that my grandfather lingered because his daughter was being wishy-washy (questioning the medical advise on moving him to hospice, rather than just getting herself to his bedside) and I'm glad Ebert didn't spend his days doped beyond comprehension just to hang on.

This sucks! I wanted to read his review of Star Wars Episiode 7!!!! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!I am sure it will be AWSOME!I am serious. And I will miss reading his reviews so much.If only he was able to review The Hobbit. Grrrrr.

of all the stupid memes that populate the internet, the "I'll pretend I don;t who some famous person is and mourn somebody with a slightly similar name" one is the least funny, creative or intelligent. A good man and great wrtier just died, let's see if we can mourn HIM and not spend time dealling with all the jackasses who want to make this thread about how hip and clever they are mmmkay?

Legitimately sad about this. His 'Great Movies' essays -- which he updated every couple weeks for a while -- introduced me to a TON of movies that I still love to death today. As a geeky teenager in the middle of nowhere, it was super key to introducing me to stuff I wouldn't have known otherwise, from The Third Man to Walkabout.

"I hated this movie. Hated, hated, hated, hated, hated this movie. Hated it. Hated every simpering stupid vacant audience-insulting moment of it. Hated the sensibility that thought anyone would like it. Hated the implied insult to the audience by its belief that anyone would be entertained by it."

The thing I always liked about his reviews is that even if I disagreed with him, he was specific enough in his review that I knew if I would like a movie that he didn't like (or not like one that he did like) before I saw it.

He laid out is reasons clearly, and generally didn't just trash a movie pointlessly.

Roger Ebert, Bill Gates, and RuPaul are playing golf. A lightning bolt outta nowhere strikes them all dead. God meets them at the Pearly Gates and says, "Sorry, guys, I missed. Jesus left his toys out and I stepped on one. I can send you back, but you each have to give up something you love."Ebert: "I can give up pizza."God sends Roger back to earth.Gates: "I love money, but I can give up money."God sends Bill back to earth.RuPaul: "I love men, but to live, I can give up men."God sends RuPaul back to earth.The three men are later walking down Sunset Boulevard when they pass a California Pizza Kitchen.Roger goes, "I just wanna smell." He goes inside and takes a big whiff. Pretty soon he is next to a thick, smelly, greasy, beautiful slice of pepperoni, and BANG! Roger Ebert goes to heaven, having had a bite of the forbidden pizza.Bill and RuPaul look at each other and agree to keep watch so the other doesn't give into temptation.As they continue walking, Bill eyes a shiny, brand new quarter, the one he's been missing from his Presidential quarters collection. "I'm not gonna touch it, I just wanna look at it," he says to himself.He bends over, getting closer, and closer. . . until. . . finally. . . BANG! RuPaul goes to heaven.

/RIP. I've known your face for as long as I can remember watching TV. "Leave of presence" my arse.

"I know it is coming, and I do not fear it, because I believe there is nothing on the other side of death to fear. I hope to be spared as much pain as possible on the approach path. I was perfectly content before I was born, and I think of death as the same state. What I am grateful for is the gift of intelligence, and for life, love, wonder, and laughter. You can't say it wasn't interesting. My lifetime's memories are what I have brought home from the trip. I will require them for eternity no more than that little souvenir of the Eiffel Tower I brought home from Paris."

gunga galunga:No. Ebert stopped slagging on Rob Schneider after Rob sent him some flowers when he was first diagnosed with cancer with a card reading "from your least favorite actor".

Rob is one of those great schticky actors that really realizes he talent range and doesn't have a single farking problem with it. He owns his niche. I remember seeing him on cribs where in front of his place he turned to the camera, raised his arms and proudly said "This is the house that Sandler built....thanks Adam!"

teenytinycornteeth:His book "I Hated Hated Hated This Movie" is one of the funniest, truest, greatest bathroom reading books in the history of...books of that...nature. Ebert Victorious still the best Onion headline of all time. So long.

I know in the Esquire article he said that if the cancer came back he wouldn't have any more treatments. When I read his blog post yesterday I had a feeling he was near the end because it read like an obituary. I only knew him as a film critic until I started reading his blog a few years ago. Damn, that guy could write. Glad he's out of his pain, and good thoughts to his beloved wife Chaz.

My favorite memory of Roger Ebert is that I went to a movie review with a friend (who was a reviewer outside of Chicago) and I was was talking during the opening credits; no actors on the screen. (It was Dante's Peak). Mr. Ebert was seated across the aisle and leaned over and told me to shut up.

"I believe that if, at the end of it all, according to our abilities, we have done something to make others a little happier, and something to make ourselves a little happier, that is about the best we can do. To make others less happy is a crime. To make ourselves unhappy is where all crime starts. We must try to contribute joy to the world. That is true no matter what our problems, our health, our circumstances. We must try."― Roger Ebert

Professor M. Frederick Hawthorne's team has developed a new form of radiation therapy that successfully put cancer into remission in mice. This innovative treatment produced none of the harmful side-effects of conventional chemo and radiation cancer therapies. Clinical trials in humans could begin soon after Hawthorne secures funding."

"A wide variety of cancers can be attacked with our BNCT technique," Hawthorne said. "The technique worked excellently in mice. We are ready to move on to trials in larger animals, then people. However, before we can start treating humans, we will need to build suitable equipment and facilities. When it is built, MU will have the first radiation therapy of this kind in the world."

Goddammitsomuch! This man through his writing made my mother's death much easier for her to comprehend and prepare for. Thank you Roger Ebert, you performed a personal favor, although we never knew you personally. Chaz Ebert, thank you for sustaining Mr. Ebert, and making him a happy and content man which enabled him to be at peace with himself enough to help my mother. Bless you both.

The most remarkable thing I remember about him is reading a review of a summer blockbuster he wrote, which he liked and I didn't.

It was the first time anyone had suggested to me that there are serious dramas, and there are "popcorn movies" -- and movies in the latter category need to be reviewed in a different context than movies in the former.

gunga galunga:SilentStrider: I hope his will contains a dig at Rob Schneider.

No. Ebert stopped slagging on Rob Schneider after Rob sent him some flowers when he was first diagnosed with cancer with a card reading "from your least favorite actor".

This. And besides, Ebert's burn wasn't of Schneider personally, but of a specific Schneider movie. Along the lines of, "you're capable of making good films, you've done it before, this wasn't one of them, stop trying to defend it as a good movie."

My only major disagreement with Ebert was on his stance of "video games can't ever be art". When it came to reviewing movies, I think he was spot on nearly every time, and I will miss him. I have a really hard time reading the crap that passes for a film review from most places these days.

blazemongr:It was the first time anyone had suggested to me that there are serious dramas, and there are "popcorn movies" -- and movies in the latter category need to be reviewed in a different context than movies in the former.

He was master of objectivity in reviewing movies. One thing I liked about his reviews was that even if he disliked a movie he did try to go out of his way to find something redeeming in it.

over_and_done:gunga galunga: SilentStrider: I hope his will contains a dig at Rob Schneider.

No. Ebert stopped slagging on Rob Schneider after Rob sent him some flowers when he was first diagnosed with cancer with a card reading "from your least favorite actor".

This. And besides, Ebert's burn wasn't of Schneider personally, but of a specific Schneider movie. Along the lines of, "you're capable of making good films, you've done it before, this wasn't one of them, stop trying to defend it as a good movie."

My only major disagreement with Ebert was on his stance of "video games can't ever be art". When it came to reviewing movies, I think he was spot on nearly every time, and I will miss him. I have a really hard time reading the crap that passes for a film review from most places these days.

Because we've cured human cancers in mice dozens of times.And, truly, that's where pretty much all our effective treatments started.But they've never been silver bullets in humans, in practice.And most of them never panned out at all.

I died laughing at his refusal to rate or discuss The Human Centipede. He just outright said "I refuse."

He WATCHED the movie, understand. Screened the whole thing. Just wouldn't dignify it with a review, despite admitting it was his job to do so... And I think that's awesome of him.

I also loved how he pointed out that he was unable to screen any more movies the day he watched The Grey, because it left such an impression that it wouldn't have been fair to the other movies. He had to put them off for a few days.

FirstNationalBastard:over_and_done: gunga galunga: SilentStrider: I hope his will contains a dig at Rob Schneider.

No. Ebert stopped slagging on Rob Schneider after Rob sent him some flowers when he was first diagnosed with cancer with a card reading "from your least favorite actor".

This. And besides, Ebert's burn wasn't of Schneider personally, but of a specific Schneider movie. Along the lines of, "you're capable of making good films, you've done it before, this wasn't one of them, stop trying to defend it as a good movie."

My only major disagreement with Ebert was on his stance of "video games can't ever be art". When it came to reviewing movies, I think he was spot on nearly every time, and I will miss him. I have a really hard time reading the crap that passes for a film review from most places these days.

Didn't he eventually reverse his opinion on video games?

I think he eventually softened the absolute "this can't ever happen" stance, to something along the line of "this might possibly someday happen, but it hasn't happened YET". With which I still disagreed, but I respected how he could hold that opinion.

Aw, dammit. I really liked that guy. Even when I had more pretentious aspirations to film criticism, I had several of his books, and appreciated his down-to-earth humanism. Not that he didn't know his shiat, cuz he did. Anyway, dammitsomuch. RIP.

I admire what he did, but some of his reviews are maddening to me. He loved Being There, which is one of my favorite films. But at the same time, he hated Three Amigos, which is another of my favorites.

It sometimes seemed like they had very rigid views about what a movie was supposed to be, and had a very hard time getting out of that box. The review that sticks in my mind is Siskel and Ebert both turning thumbs down on a quirky little number called A Christmas Story. I think if it had been exactly the same movie but in French, they would have stepped over each other saying how much they loved it.

TrixieDelite:Two thumbs down and ten toes up.Siskel and Ebert were like the two old guys in the Muppets theater.Loved their arguments, though I wish they would have gotten more physical and thrown a few punches.

trippdogg:It sometimes seemed like they had very rigid views about what a movie was supposed to be, and had a very hard time getting out of that box. The review that sticks in my mind is Siskel and Ebert both turning thumbs down on a quirky little number called A Christmas Story. I think if it had been exactly the same movie but in French, they would have stepped over each other saying how much they loved it.

But you could always read his reviews, and learn exactly why he didn't like it. Often his well explained negative reviews got me more interested in seeing a movie than any other glowing positive review.

A true giant of the profession, which will be reeling in his absence for a long time.

Saw, but didn't meet, him (and Siskel) the one time we went to a taping of "The Tonight Show with Johnny Carson" in 1992. Who'd have imagined that, 20 years later, they'd both be dead? Ebert was, at the time, quite portly so I imagined heart disease or something might get him, but I would never have imagined thyroid cancer.

Whenever an interesting movie came out, I always tuned in to the show (or, later, trotted over to suntimes.com) to see what he thought of it. More often than not, it seemed that, between him and whomever else was on the show, he gave the more accurate reviews.

ITT: bitter Farkers who can't comprehend that other people (chiefly movie critics) can have opinions that differ from their own. Also, other Farkers who can't separate their feelings about a movie (something meaningless) from the fact that a respected and famous movie critic has passed away from a terrible disease (something important). Also, Farkers who obviously never read Ebert closely and don't realize that he was anything but a snob - he was an everyman, frequently gave movies the benefit of the doubt, and was generally pretty forgiving to filmmakers.

That said, goodnight moviecriticman. One of my favorite writers. R.I.P.

L.D. Ablo:More than anything, that show was genuine. Even reality TV is scripted today. But when Roger looked pissed off, he really was pissed off. Aside from sports, there's nothing genuine anywhere today.

On a side note, this is one of the thing I still like about Letterman - he's got enough clout to say what he feels like even if it pissed people off. If he's mad you're gong to hear about it. I feel the same way about SNL - it's about the last live thing on TV and some people can't wait to get rid of it so they can have an entire TV world of risk free vanilla blandness.

And you're right about Ebert - he was real. They'll never be another like him.

PanicMan:But you could always read his reviews, and learn exactly why he didn't like it. Often his well explained negative reviews got me more interested in seeing a movie than any other glowing positive review.

Case in point with the review for Christmas Story. They both disliked it, Gene for its disjointed nature and transitions (on technically Gene being right there) and Roger gave the movie credit for creating that perfect nostalgia movie but that he never was a fan of the style. They both disliked the filming itself, saying that the misty effect does nothing but blur the picture and adds no relevance to the nostalgia.

so they disliked it, but gave a clear reason why. That's the mark of a good reviewer because one could read the review and think "Well yeah, he doesn't like it but I freaking love those movies"

Then he released a tiny little standalone version, "Ebert's Little Movie Glossary," and by that time I had five or six in it.

Then The Bigger Little Movie Glossary came out with another six or so.

It's been so long, I forgot what most of them are. I remember Hollywood Cop Car was mine, I think.

This (when the site comes back up) is the last thing of mine that he published.

This is killing me. I told my wife on the 2nd when he posted that he was taking a step back from reviewing that I didn't think he had a chance of making it to 2014. Little did I know he didn't have a chance at making it to Friday.

I ran into Roger a lot when I worked in downtown Chicago 30 years or so back. He was always nice to people on the street. His partner, Gene Siskel, crossed the street in front of my parked car while I was firing up a joint one day. He saw the whole thing and laughed. A really sad day this is. I will miss Ebert. Can anyone recommend a good film critic that I can latch onto now?

The All-Powerful Atheismo:The movie was alright (a little monotonous) until the ending when he apparently starts to walk on water. Then it turned into something sublime.

Of course, it invites you to make the same mistake that the other characters in the movie have made. But you're sitting there watching the guy walking on water deep enough to put his umbrella all the way in.

Darth_Lukecash:Loved the man. He was active in his newsletter and his web page. Had a few comments exchanged with him, which was very cool.

I always thought that was cool, too. I actually made a point of saying on his blog's comments how much I appreciated him and his work a while back, because I knew he wouldn't be around for that much longer.

dramboxf:I told my wife on the 2nd when he posted that he was taking a step back from reviewing that I didn't think he had a chance of making it to 2014. Little did I know he didn't have a chance at making it to Friday.

im not a huge movie guy and basically, i don't really read reviews; if i want to see something, i'll see it, but rarely do i bother seeing what others say. that said, like many others here, i remember watching his show (my parents were big movie buffs and this was the pre-cable era) many, many times as a kid, but as an adult i kind of grew out of him.

but it is a shame, i thought the same thing you said; he announced his "Leave Of Presence" on 4/2, and 48 hours, game over.

OKObserver:I ran into Roger a lot when I worked in downtown Chicago 30 years or so back. He was always nice to people on the street. His partner, Gene Siskel, crossed the street in front of my parked car while I was firing up a joint one day. He saw the whole thing and laughed. A really sad day this is. I will miss Ebert. Can anyone recommend a good film critic that I can latch onto now?

There's a guy at the LA times that isn't bad, he does the reviews on NPR, Bob Mondello. He's no Roger but he's also not hackey like a lot of them out there are. He'll find something good in a movie even if he has distaste for it.

"I love horror films that truly shock, scare and provoke. But after 30 years of this stuff, I'm bored to death and sick to death of movies that seem to have one goal: How can we gross out the audience by torturing nearly every major character in the movie?"

rickythepenguin:im not a huge movie guy and basically, i don't really read reviews;

I loved his reviews; didn't always agree, and it rarely (if ever) swayed me from seeing a movie I was interested in. But I loved how he wrote. And his non-review and non-film writing was sublime. It's hard to express yourself as clearly as he did. And I have to admit that I agreed with a lot of his politics, too.

over_and_done:FirstNationalBastard: over_and_done: gunga galunga: SilentStrider: I hope his will contains a dig at Rob Schneider.

No. Ebert stopped slagging on Rob Schneider after Rob sent him some flowers when he was first diagnosed with cancer with a card reading "from your least favorite actor".

This. And besides, Ebert's burn wasn't of Schneider personally, but of a specific Schneider movie. Along the lines of, "you're capable of making good films, you've done it before, this wasn't one of them, stop trying to defend it as a good movie."

My only major disagreement with Ebert was on his stance of "video games can't ever be art". When it came to reviewing movies, I think he was spot on nearly every time, and I will miss him. I have a really hard time reading the crap that passes for a film review from most places these days.

Didn't he eventually reverse his opinion on video games?

I think he eventually softened the absolute "this can't ever happen" stance, to something along the line of "this might possibly someday happen, but it hasn't happened YET". With which I still disagreed, but I respected how he could hold that opinion.

No he changed it to "No they can never be art but I shouldn't have said anything without ever playing one so you didn't have a way to argue with me."

"In a July 1, 2010, blog entry, Ebert maintained his position that video games cannot ever be art in principle, but conceded that he should not have expressed this skepticism without being more familiar with the actual experience of playing them."

considering 90% of his reviews were absolutely off base and geared for the mcdonalds walmart church crowd, i dont see the big loss. like movies are even worth reviewing, if you want drama or education you read a fuking book, if you have 2 hours you need to kill, you watch a movie.

OKObserver:I ran into Roger a lot when I worked in downtown Chicago 30 years or so back. He was always nice to people on the street. His partner, Gene Siskel, crossed the street in front of my parked car while I was firing up a joint one day. He saw the whole thing and laughed. A really sad day this is. I will miss Ebert. Can anyone recommend a good film critic that I can latch onto now?

Mimic_Octopus:considering 90% of his reviews were absolutely off base and geared for the mcdonalds walmart church crowd, i dont see the big loss. like movies are even worth reviewing, if you want drama or education you read a fuking book, if you have 2 hours you need to kill, you watch a movie.

I loved his reviews; didn't always agree, and it rarely (if ever) swayed me from seeing a movie I was interested in. But I loved how he wrote. And his non-review and non-film writing was sublime. It's hard to express yourself as clearly as he did. And I have to admit that I agreed with a lot of his politics, too.

i know nothing of his politics or his non-film writing. the last review i can remember of his is basically, nothing.

like of recent movies, to illustrate how "non movie" i am, i saw Django about a month after it was released, and all i knew was civil war, slavery, bloody as fark. i didn't seek out whether it was good or not. and like, "Burt Wondersotne" is getting killed (is it even in theaters?) but I will guaranteedly see it. but the last time i read a review to see if it was wroth my $8 was so long ago i don't even know.

I just don't "do" reviews and thus, don't know anything of waht Ebert did the last 15-20 years.

Roger Ebert, Bill Gates, and RuPaul are playing golf. A lightning bolt outta nowhere strikes them all dead. God meets them at the Pearly Gates and says, "Sorry, guys, I missed. Jesus left his toys out and I stepped on one. I can send you back, but you each have to give up something you love."Ebert: "I can give up pizza."God sends Roger back to earth.Gates: "I love money, but I can give up money."God sends Bill back to earth.RuPaul: "I love men, but to live, I can give up men."God sends RuPaul back to earth.The three men are later walking down Sunset Boulevard when they pass a California Pizza Kitchen.Roger goes, "I just wanna smell." He goes inside and takes a big whiff. Pretty soon he is next to a thick, smelly, greasy, beautiful slice of pepperoni, and BANG! Roger Ebert goes to heaven, having had a bite of the forbidden pizza.Bill and RuPaul look at each other and agree to keep watch so the other doesn't give into temptation.As they continue walking, Bill eyes a shiny, brand new quarter, the one he's been missing from his Presidential quarters collection. "I'm not gonna touch it, I just wanna look at it," he says to himself.He bends over, getting closer, and closer. . . until. . . finally. . . BANG! RuPaul goes to heaven.

/RIP. I've known your face for as long as I can remember watching TV. "Leave of presence" my arse.

rickythepenguin:but the last time i read a review to see if it was wroth my $8 was so long ago i don't even kn

That's because (In my opinion) the era of reading a single reviewer in your local paper ended with the wide proliferation of the internet and sites like Rotten Tomatoes. While you might really enjoy a reviewer, nobody agrees with somebody all of the time. But looking at the results of 100 or more reviews simultaneously can at least give you an idea of whether or not a film is *terrible* or watchable.

SMB2811:over_and_done: FirstNationalBastard: over_and_done: gunga galunga: SilentStrider: I hope his will contains a dig at Rob Schneider.

No. Ebert stopped slagging on Rob Schneider after Rob sent him some flowers when he was first diagnosed with cancer with a card reading "from your least favorite actor".

This. And besides, Ebert's burn wasn't of Schneider personally, but of a specific Schneider movie. Along the lines of, "you're capable of making good films, you've done it before, this wasn't one of them, stop trying to defend it as a good movie."

My only major disagreement with Ebert was on his stance of "video games can't ever be art". When it came to reviewing movies, I think he was spot on nearly every time, and I will miss him. I have a really hard time reading the crap that passes for a film review from most places these days.

Didn't he eventually reverse his opinion on video games?

I think he eventually softened the absolute "this can't ever happen" stance, to something along the line of "this might possibly someday happen, but it hasn't happened YET". With which I still disagreed, but I respected how he could hold that opinion.

No he changed it to "No they can never be art but I shouldn't have said anything without ever playing one so you didn't have a way to argue with me."

"In a July 1, 2010, blog entry, Ebert maintained his position that video games cannot ever be art in principle, but conceded that he should not have expressed this skepticism without being more familiar with the actual experience of playing them."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Ebert

My only disagreement with anything he's ever written as well.

I wonder if famous book critics made the same arguments against movies when they were first hitting mainstream.

I thought the death was rather forced and it seem to come about with no proper context as you would expect in a big budget death. The lack of dramatic music was a mistake by the director as I really feel the audience would have appreciated it and it would have helped the audience prepare for the twist ending.

So, even though it had its dramatic points, I still must give this death a thumb down as I feel the director didn't really put his heart into it.....

Oy, that's terrible. I watched his show a lot back in the day. It's safe to say that he and Siskel played a big part in my enthusiasm for movies (good and bad) way back when. Hell, I remember being really jazzed to hear what they had to say about MST3K: The Movie.

And man, he could tear horrible movies a new one in hilarious fashion.

SMB2811:No he changed it to "No they can never be art but I shouldn't have said anything without ever playing one so you didn't have a way to argue with me."

"In a July 1, 2010, blog entry, Ebert maintained his position that video games cannot ever be art in principle, but conceded that he should not have expressed this skepticism without being more familiar with the actual experience of playing them."

Interesting enough. I've probably enjoyed my favorite videogames more than I ever enjoyed my favorite movies, based on time of play and replayability. But trying to see his perspective through a filmmaking standpoint, in the near future you still won't see brilliant screen plays and cinematography in a videogame. It would be a waste - unless it was a videogame adapted from a movie, in which case it wouldn't be original. Movies reach a wider audience ($) than videogames do; brilliant screenwriting and cinematography would truly be wasted on the widest gamer demographic.So now, if you look at the core audience for, say, Goodfellas or Unforgiven, vs. the Venn diagram where gamers and film fanatics intersect, you're putting the aforementioned movies up against, what? The videogame equivalent of a Justin Bieber beach movie?

If I had time I'd still be playing videogames at 38, but while the 30-something gamer population is probably still growing, that audience likely doesn't justify the investment to put a game on par with what a film critic like Ebert would consider "art"

Yeah.It used to appear at the end of his Movie Home Companion.Then he released a tiny little standalone version, "Ebert's Little Movie Glossary," and by that time I had five or six in it.Then The Bigger Little Movie Glossary came out with another six or so.It's been so long, I forgot what most of them are. I remember Hollywood Cop Car was mine, I think.

This (when the site comes back up) is the last thing of mine that he published.

This is killing me. I told my wife on the 2nd when he posted that he was taking a step back from reviewing that I didn't think he had a chance of making it to 2014. Little did I know he didn't have a chance at making it to Friday.

I was a regular poster on his Compuserve forum. I drew his attention to an article on Entertainment Weekly about how the branch of the academy that voted on documentaries turned off Hoop Dreams after one hour. He thanked me and said he would go read it. Next episode of Siskel & Ebert, he did a segment about that article. I felt like Albert Brooks in Broadcast News: "I say it here, it comes out there."

trippdogg:It sometimes seemed like they had very rigid views about what a movie was supposed to be, and had a very hard time getting out of that box. The review that sticks in my mind is Siskel and Ebert both turning thumbs down on a quirky little number called A Christmas Story. I think if it had been exactly the same movie but in French, they would have stepped over each other saying how much they loved it.

I dunno. It seemed to me Ebert could appreciate e.g. a mindless action flick for what it was, and review it accordingly.

Gaseous Anomaly:trippdogg: It sometimes seemed like they had very rigid views about what a movie was supposed to be, and had a very hard time getting out of that box. The review that sticks in my mind is Siskel and Ebert both turning thumbs down on a quirky little number called A Christmas Story. I think if it had been exactly the same movie but in French, they would have stepped over each other saying how much they loved it.

I dunno. It seemed to me Ebert could appreciate e.g. a mindless action flick for what it was, and review it accordingly.

He gave "Dodgeball" a 3/4 review saying it was stupidly funny and didn't spoil the best jokes in the preview.

I know what you mean. My first interaction with him was pretentiousness itself. (On MY part, btw.)

I sent him six single-spaced pages in Halvetica 9pt of "corrections" to his 1987 Movie Home Companion. Stupid things like referring to certain characters incorrectly, or explaining misconceptions about military or police matters that he'd written about in his reviews. Some of what I wrote appeared verbatim in future editions of the MHC.

I grew up reading his reviews in the newspaper and watching him on TV. He inspired me to be a better writer and more "active" movie viewer (aka: pay more attention to what I am really watching). I will DVR "Archer" tonight and watch "Goodfellas" and "Godfather I and II" tonight...

My husband and he chatted in a compuserve forum (forum? newsgroup?) back in the day. Ebert was really great, connected with all of the other members and enjoyed spending his time with the gang.

He would often say he was going to have some interview with a star, what would you like to as him or her? My husband knew I was a huge Val Kilmer fan at the time and when his name came up, he asked me what I'd like to ask.. I had no idea that Ebert would actually ask the question, so kind of sarcastically said "Boxers or briefs?" Next thing I knew, I had my answer.

I didn't always agree with his reviews and a lot of the movies that he hated, I enjoyed. But I always had a lot of respect for the guy, he said how he felt and let everyone know when he thought a movie was truly great.

Nana's Vibrator:SMB2811:No he changed it to "No they can never be art but I shouldn't have said anything without ever playing one so you didn't have a way to argue with me."

"In a July 1, 2010, blog entry, Ebert maintained his position that video games cannot ever be art in principle, but conceded that he should not have expressed this skepticism without being more familiar with the actual experience of playing them."

Interesting enough. I've probably enjoyed my favorite videogames more than I ever enjoyed my favorite movies, based on time of play and replayability. But trying to see his perspective through a filmmaking standpoint, in the near future you still won't see brilliant screen plays and cinematography in a videogame. It would be a waste - unless it was a videogame adapted from a movie, in which case it wouldn't be original. Movies reach a wider audience ($) than videogames do; brilliant screenwriting and cinematography would truly be wasted on the widest gamer demographic.So now, if you look at the core audience for, say, Goodfellas or Unforgiven, vs. the Venn diagram where gamers and film fanatics intersect, you're putting the aforementioned movies up against, what? The videogame equivalent of a Justin Bieber beach movie?

If I had time I'd still be playing videogames at 38, but while the 30-something gamer population is probably still growing, that audience likely doesn't justify the investment to put a game on par with what a film critic like Ebert would consider "art"

The reason he changed his stance from 'Never' to 'Never, and I should have played one for a few minutes so you plebs couldn't argue with me' was because so many viewers suggested he look at Shadow of the Colossus before saying that.

I too will now suggest that if you only see games as 'a Justin Bieber beach movie' you also look at Shadow of the Colossus. That one fills the 'great cinematography.' As for stories, many games of several genres have created stories that would be considered great if they had picked a different medium to tell it in.

The medium should not dictate what can and can not be art. 100 years ago we would be talking about movies in the place of video games and literature in the place of movies.

I don't get it. Why is RuPaul going to heaven if Bill Gates picks up the quarter?

Treygreen13:But looking at the results of 100 or more reviews simultaneously can at least give you an idea of whether or not a film is *terrible* or watchable.

yeah, to my "thing" about avoiding reviews, I saw "Argo" opening night, my only concept of what it was about being, "an account of the mission to grab hostages in the 1980 iran embassy". fast forward to me getting knocked on my ass by how awesome the movie was, getting home, discussing the movie with my wife for like, 30 minutes, and then thinking, "hey, i wonder what Rotten Tomatoes thinks!"

Beanlet: I didn't always agree with his reviews and a lot of the movies that he hated, I enjoyed. But I always had a lot of respect for the guy, he said how he felt and let everyone know when he thought a movie was truly great.

I'm still at odds with his positive review of Speed 2: Cruise Control and wonder why he liked The Wicker Man so much (as indicated in his four-star [!!!] review of Lakeview Terrace), but differences of opinion are the things that make film discussion great*.

*except in the case of Armond White, because that fool is TROLLIN'

coco ebert:NOOOOO!! So sad at this one. I always loved his writing- even when I didn't agree with his assessment. A true lover of movies. :( RIP

monEater * * Smartest * Funniest 2013-04-04 03:47:40 PM That was quick, we just had the "Ebert cuts his workload" article about his cancer returning yesterday.=============================================

Considering his prolific presence online (posting upwards of about 50 times a day on twitter)... he made exactly 1 post since the 30th of March, a link to the blog, and that's it.

He seemed pretty happy and excited, but perhaps it was a backhanded way of saying things are moving and he's happy it'll still be going on without him. Who knows.

I liked his reviews, although I noticed that movies with nekkid.women invariably got a thumbs up from Roger even when Genes thumb was down. In praise of the exploration of human sexuality. I think he just needed to get laid more often.

/no surprise Obama was a big fan, he sat really far to the left with lots of angry denunciations of conservatives.

Jesus, I just remembered that one of my entries to his glossary was the Magical Death Hand Wave: When a relative of partner of the hero is murdered, and the hero must view the body, (always still at the scene of the crime,) the hero will pass his hand over the eyes of the victim and voila! magically, the eyes will remain closed.

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener:Beanlet: I didn't always agree with his reviews and a lot of the movies that he hated, I enjoyed. But I always had a lot of respect for the guy, he said how he felt and let everyone know when he thought a movie was truly great.

I'm still at odds with his positive review of Speed 2: Cruise Control and wonder why he liked The Wicker Man so much (as indicated in his four-star [!!!] review of Lakeview Terrace), but differences of opinion are the things that make film discussion great*.

Maybe with The Wicker Man he thought it was supposed to be a comedy, his same justification for his good reviews for Congo and Silver Bullet.

dramboxf:When a relative of partner of the hero is murdered, and the hero must view the body, (always still at the scene of the crime,) the hero will pass his hand over the eyes of the victim and voila! magically, the eyes will remain closed.

well.....true, it is cliche, but the custom is that he physically closes his eyes.

adam carolla mentioned a good one; in sports movies, whenever the stadium/arena's/boxing ring lights get turned on, you have to Foley in a MASSIVE sound of like, a hundred circuit breakers going SSSSSSHHHHHHHHHHHMAAAAACCCCKKKKCRUNCH!!! he's like, "how many times have you been at a game and the lights come on and you don't hear anything? NOT IN THE MOVIES! Every lightswitch that gets hit sounds like a godamn space shuttle launch!"

"I love horror films that truly shock, scare and provoke. But after 30 years of this stuff, I'm bored to death and sick to death of movies that seem to have one goal: How can we gross out the audience by torturing nearly every major character in the movie?"

Nice job, Sam Raimi.

Actually, it was Richard Roeper who wrote that. Sadly, he is still with us.

rickythepenguin:well.....true, it is cliche, but the custom is that he physically closes his eyes.

The point is that the eyes rarely stay closed when you do that with a real dead body. Also, you never see them actually close the eyes; they just pass their hands over the eye "area". Try closing someone's eyes (dead or alive) with the pinky-edge of your hand. They do it that way, I'm almost certain, so as not to mess up the makeup.

are you kidding me? he turned himself into a sideshow freak! oh I know so sad. I know he couldn't feed himself anymore, but he could have ate a bullet. why not just get a V for vendetta mask and spare us the horror

I'm more bummed than I thought I would be. It's not entirely unexpected, of course. He had been in bad health for quite some time. But I just posted on the thread about him the other day, and read his "Leave of presence" statement just yesterday, so it's strange.

It's really the end of an era in film writing. And every account I've heard is that he was a pretty nice guy in person, as well. These quotes below are just killer:

"Sometimes two people will regard each other over a gulf too wide to ever be bridged, and know immediately what could have happened, and that it never will."

-

"Life always has an unhappy ending, but you can have a lot of fun along the way, and everything doesn't have to be dripping in deep significance."

-

"I began to realize that I had tended to avoid some people because of my instant conclusions about who they were and what they would have to say. I discovered that everyone, speaking honestly and openly, had important things to tell me."

-

"Because we are human, because we are bound by gravity and the limitations of our bodies, because we live in a world where the news is often bad and the prospects disturbing, there is a need for another world somewhere, a world where Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers live."

-

"In thinking about 'depressing movies,' many people don't realize that all bad movies are depressing, and no good movies are."

-

"I believe that if, at the end of it all, according to our abilities, we have done something to make others a little happier, and something to make ourselves a little happier, that is about the best we can do. To make others less happy is a crime. To make ourselves unhappy is where all crime starts. We must try to contribute joy to the world. That is true no matter what our problems, our health, our circumstances. We must try."

dramboxf:The point is that the eyes rarely stay closed when you do that with a real dead body. Also, you never see them actually close the eyes; they just pass their hands over the eye "area". Try closing someone's eyes (dead or alive) with the pinky-edge of your hand. They do it that way, I'm almost certain, so as not to mess up the makeup.

rickythepenguin:dramboxf: When a relative of partner of the hero is murdered, and the hero must view the body, (always still at the scene of the crime,) the hero will pass his hand over the eyes of the victim and voila! magically, the eyes will remain closed.

well.....true, it is cliche, but the custom is that he physically closes his eyes.

adam carolla mentioned a good one; in sports movies, whenever the stadium/arena's/boxing ring lights get turned on, you have to Foley in a MASSIVE sound of like, a hundred circuit breakers going SSSSSSHHHHHHHHHHHMAAAAACCCCKKKKCRUNCH!!! he's like, "how many times have you been at a game and the lights come on and you don't hear anything? NOT IN THE MOVIES! Every lightswitch that gets hit sounds like a godamn space shuttle launch!"

One of my favorites was one given to him by long forgotten comedian, Emo Philips, on how the two most difficult words to say in the english language are "yes" and "no". A foreign character, no matter how good his english is, will say "yes" and "no" in their native tongue.

Fark.I knew it was coming but it's sad to see a seemingly nice guy with such knowledge leave.Especially that way.Especially with half of the people dismissing him as "that guy who didn't think video games are art".

gunga galunga:One of my favorites was one given to him by long forgotten comedian, Emo Philips, on how the two most difficult words to say in the english language are "yes" and "no". A foreign character, no matter how good his english is, will say "yes" and "no" in their native tongue.

God, yes! I'm browsing the Glossary now, and that's one of my favorites. "Hardest Word in the English Language" by Emo Phillips, but it's just "Yes."

jedzz:Zapruder: The very last lines of his review of the new Evil Dead:

"I love horror films that truly shock, scare and provoke. But after 30 years of this stuff, I'm bored to death and sick to death of movies that seem to have one goal: How can we gross out the audience by torturing nearly every major character in the movie?"

Nice job, Sam Raimi.

Actually, it was Richard Roeper who wrote that. Sadly, he is still with us.

Roeper's review of the Evil Dead remake made me want to see it even more. What he describes is exactly what I was hoping for with this movie.

I always thought what the young'uns who got started on the franchise with Army of Darkness thought when they finally got around to seeing the first movie.

Yeah, that sucks. I used to love watching him and Siskel when I was growing up. I rarely ever agreed with them completely; probably more so, Ebert. Even to this day, I still enjoy reading up on Wikipedia entries for movies, and seeing that he is almost invariably included in the quoted reviewers. And, still, in many case, I've always agreed with him.

It's a shame what he had to go through. It's a shame to see him go. But he didn't go without a fight.

durbnpoisn:Yeah, that sucks. I used to love watching him and Siskel when I was growing up. I rarely ever agreed with them completely; probably more so, Ebert. Even to this day, I still enjoy reading up on Wikipedia entries for movies, and seeing that he is almost invariably included in the quoted reviewers. And, still, in many case, I've always agreed with him.

It's a shame what he had to go through. It's a shame to see him go. But he didn't go without a fight.

I just want it stated explicitly that when Abe Vigoda finally shuffles off this mortal coil, I will personally hunt down and murder any of you farkers who start in with the "RIP (kinda sounds like the guy's name)" posts.

Raptavio:I just want it stated explicitly that when Abe Vigoda finally shuffles off this mortal coil, I will personally hunt down and murder any of you farkers who start in with the "RIP (kinda sounds like the guy's name)" posts.

You're pushing it with Ebert.

Just start putting people who do it on ignore. I do it for anyone who uses the phrase "brown people" on this site and the overall IQ of what I've read has gone up tremendously.

dramboxf:gunga galunga: One of my favorites was one given to him by long forgotten comedian, Emo Philips, on how the two most difficult words to say in the english language are "yes" and "no". A foreign character, no matter how good his english is, will say "yes" and "no" in their native tongue.

God, yes! I'm browsing the Glossary now, and that's one of my favorites. "Hardest Word in the English Language" by Emo Phillips, but it's just "Yes."

Probably because "no" is "no" in many other languages. But the rule still applies (Nyett, nein, etc)

Raptavio:I just want it stated explicitly that when Abe Vigoda finally shuffles off this mortal coil, I will personally hunt down and murder any of you farkers who start in with the "RIP (kinda sounds like the guy's name)" posts.

bigbobowski:are you kidding me? he turned himself into a sideshow freak! oh I know so sad. I know he couldn't feed himself anymore, but he could have ate a bullet. why not just get a V for vendetta mask and spare us the horror

I live with my mom

Worst attempt I've seen in a long time. And that includes the politics tab.

I'm going to the funeral of a good friend tomorrow, and now Gene has lost his battle with farking cancer. This has not been a good couple of days for me. I guess I'll get good and drunk tonight. Tomorrow night too.

Generally, I liked his style of writing.I may have disagreed with some movies he liked (or hated).But you've gotta respect a guy who saw all those movies for all those years..... especially considering maybe 5% of everything released in a given year is actually good.that's a lot of absolute crap he had to sit through.

I'm going to the funeral of a good friend tomorrow, and now Gene Roger has lost his battle with farking cancer. This has not been a good couple of days for me. I guess I'll get good and drunk tonight. Tomorrow night too.

gunga galunga:bigbobowski: are you kidding me? he turned himself into a sideshow freak! oh I know so sad. I know he couldn't feed himself anymore, but he could have ate a bullet. why not just get a V for vendetta mask and spare us the horror

I live with my mom

Worst attempt I've seen in a long time. And that includes the politics tab.

worst attempt at what? I can't post my opinion because it is not the same as yours? let me know if this is better: He was a great man. granted he made his fortune watching movies, and telling you should go see them or not. 50 percent of the time he may have been right (in your opinion) the other 50 he was just some a**hole. who cares that he's dead. maybe his family and they should be. he added absolutely nothing to the human condition, except whether Aliens vs. Predators should get a thumbs up or thumbs down.

In his defense, at least the guy gave negative reviews. Which is more than I can say for NPR's movie critic, who thinks each and every "film" he views is the pinnacle of all cinema, incredible achievements of directing, photography, lighting, sound, writing, and acting. look, some movies suck. most actually. and there are better show your inelligence than to approve every "film" that comes your way.

bigbobowski:gunga galunga: bigbobowski: are you kidding me? he turned himself into a sideshow freak! oh I know so sad. I know he couldn't feed himself anymore, but he could have ate a bullet. why not just get a V for vendetta mask and spare us the horror

I live with my mom

Worst attempt I've seen in a long time. And that includes the politics tab.

worst attempt at what? I can't post my opinion because it is not the same as yours? let me know if this is better: He was a great man. granted he made his fortune watching movies, and telling you should go see them or not. 50 percent of the time he may have been right (in your opinion) the other 50 he was just some a**hole. who cares that he's dead. maybe his family and they should be. he added absolutely nothing to the human condition, except whether Aliens vs. Predators should get a thumbs up or thumbs down.

xkillyourfacex:In his defense, at least the guy gave negative reviews. Which is more than I can say for NPR's movie critic, who thinks each and every "film" he views is the pinnacle of all cinema, incredible achievements of directing, photography, lighting, sound, writing, and acting. look, some movies suck. most actually. and there are better show your inelligence than to approve every "film" that comes your way.

"Jay, audiences are tired of your negativity. From now on, you will only rank movies from 'good' to great'.""What if the movies stinks?""That's what 'good' is for."

Knucklepopper:That was such a shocking bit of news; like finding out your fifth grade teacher died.But now I'm obsessed; what did Ebert say about Siskel's death in 1999? I can't find an obit him quoting anywhere.

I remember on their show him playing the clip of him and Siskel singing a duet on The Critic.

gunga galunga:bigbobowski: gunga galunga: bigbobowski: are you kidding me? he turned himself into a sideshow freak! oh I know so sad. I know he couldn't feed himself anymore, but he could have ate a bullet. why not just get a V for vendetta mask and spare us the horror

I live with my mom

Worst attempt I've seen in a long time. And that includes the politics tab.

worst attempt at what? I can't post my opinion because it is not the same as yours? let me know if this is better: He was a great man. granted he made his fortune watching movies, and telling you should go see them or not. 50 percent of the time he may have been right (in your opinion) the other 50 he was just some a**hole. who cares that he's dead. maybe his family and they should be. he added absolutely nothing to the human condition, except whether Aliens vs. Predators should get a thumbs up or thumbs down.

I'm not giving you any points. Deal with it!

all right you win. I used to watch the show back in the day. he did seem like a nice guy, I deal with much bigger jerks every day. but you gotta admit that plastic surgery was pretty scary

Krustofsky:Dang, the newspaper today said he was cutting back on his schedule.

Don't think he realized how much.

RIP

Actually, I think he did realize the magnitude of his statement. The man wrote a piece, on average, every day for something like 40 years. You don't just suddenly announce you're not going to be doing that anymore and not have an inkling inside of what means.

gunga galunga:Knucklepopper: That was such a shocking bit of news; like finding out your fifth grade teacher died.But now I'm obsessed; what did Ebert say about Siskel's death in 1999? I can't find an obit him quoting anywhere.

I remember on their show him playing the clip of him and Siskel singing a duet on The Critic.

He was a great reviewer. I didn't agree with him all the time, but I usually respected his opinion. I liked his non-movie writing as well.

I thank Roger and Gene for a lot of reasons, but a couple stand out for me.

Firstly, they put me on to one of my favorite movies of all time. Anyone who remembers their early years will remember how much they hated two particular types of movie: comedies with bathroom and/or drug humor, and horror/slasher movies from the 80s. So imagine my shock when they gave "two thumbs up" to a horror movie... a sequel to a crappy movie I'd seen on Showtime. I was so intrigued by it getting a positive review I ended up watching Evil Dead 2 and loving it. I watch that movie (my DVD signed by Ash himself) every couple of years.

Secondly, their review of The Crying Game. I didn't think it was the end-all be-all of cinema... but when I watched the review they never once even hinted at the big reveal in that movie. They were both so good at their job that they gave a perfect, full length spoiler-free review of that film. They never even suggested they were leaving something out, they never seemed to be talking around a subject.

Also: Both were vocal champions of the letterbox format when TVs were an unhelpful aspect ratio. It always amazed me seeing how much studios were cutting off for pan and scan.

Ebert's death is really the end of an era. He'd better be on next year's Oscar Remembrance reel (he did write, so he qualifies).

Ebert may have been a film critic, but he was a damn good writer. He was obviously no Nabokov, but he knew how to communicate: "I hated this movie. Hated hated hated hated hated this movie. Hated it. Hated every simpering stupid vacant audience-insulting moment of it."

Surool:Also: Both were vocal champions of the letterbox format when TVs were an unhelpful aspect ratio. It always amazed me seeing how much studios were cutting off for pan and scan.

Maybe my wife's first husband should have watched more S&E. CSB: She got him a laserdisc player for his birthday one year, and helpfully purchased a few laserdics of his favorite movies. One was a Clint Eastwood western, can't remember which one.

He:

a) Insisted it was broken and;b) made her take it back for replacement

because of the black bands at the top and bottom of his 4:3 TV screen. Nothing, and I mean nothing, including diagrams explaining and a film encyclopedia entry would help him grasp "aspect ratio."

dramboxf:Surool: Also: Both were vocal champions of the letterbox format when TVs were an unhelpful aspect ratio. It always amazed me seeing how much studios were cutting off for pan and scan.

Maybe my wife's first husband should have watched more S&E. CSB: She got him a laserdisc player for his birthday one year, and helpfully purchased a few laserdics of his favorite movies. One was a Clint Eastwood western, can't remember which one.

He:

a) Insisted it was broken and;b) made her take it back for replacement

because of the black bands at the top and bottom of his 4:3 TV screen. Nothing, and I mean nothing, including diagrams explaining and a film encyclopedia entry would help him grasp "aspect ratio."

I'm convinced that was the beginning of the end of their marriage.

It would have been a deal-breaker for me... not over movies, but being so thick-headed that they couldn't learn from having the situation explained to them.

Surool:It would have been a deal-breaker for me... not over movies, but being so thick-headed that they couldn't learn from having the situation explained to them.

Me, too. I mean, even the basic, "Hey, remember when we went to the movies LAST WEEK? Remember how the screen was like five times as wide as it was tall? Yes? Now, how many times wide as tall is your TV?" failed.

There have been smarter people than Roger Ebert, and better writers, and people who loved breasts more. But nobody was a smarter tits-loving writer than Ebert. I don't think he copped a single feel in the first quarter-century of his life that he didn't find a way to work into an essay on letterboxing or his review of The Black Cauldron.

Adjusted for the fact that I'm posting it on fark.com, this is the highest praise I can think of. I'll miss him.

R.I.P., Roger Ebert. One of the best writers, critics, and class acts of all time, and someone that I always looked up to as a budding journalist and critic from middle school through college. You'll be missed.

A favorite S&E moment was once, on Letterman's NBC show, Dave intro'd them as "Having gotten married in a secret ceremony earlier today!" It got a small laugh, but then it turned into a roar when Gene and Roger walked out, and over to the couch, holding hands. Dave's interviews with them were always great.

1) Meh. I don't worship at the temple of Ebert the way 80% of Farkers seem to.2) ONCE AGAIN it's proven that when a 'famous' person reports that they are sick but things look good it's a certainty that they will be dead sooner rather that later.3) Read one of the obits in the Trib - guy's name is Kogan or something like that. It was so over the top in it's praise for Ebbie that it was like he was giving Rog slobbering obiturially blow job. I don't think the guy would have written one like that for someone who actually matter.

douchebag/hater:1) Meh. I don't worship at the temple of Ebert the way 80% of Farkers seem to.2) ONCE AGAIN it's proven that when a 'famous' person reports that they are sick but things look good it's a certainty that they will be dead sooner rather that later.3) Read one of the obits in the Trib - guy's name is Kogan or something like that. It was so over the top in it's praise for Ebbie that it was like he was giving Rog slobbering obiturially blow job. I don't think the guy would have written one like that for someone who actually matter.

And when you die, no one but your cat will care, and she will eat your face.

That was quick from the time he announced he was cutting his workload because the cancer returned to his death.

I always enjoyed his reviews...even when I didn't agree with him. The one thing I liked is that he would rate a genre flick based on the standards of the genre...rather than as a comparison to The Seven Samurai or Citizen Kane.

I saw someone upthread mention they had corresponded with Roger and are included several times in one of his movie glossaries. That's an actual csb and made me decide to add mine.

A few years ago Roger wrote a blog post about limericks, in limerick. It was brilliant. The commenters began to write their comments in limerick as well and it inspired Roger to turn the thread in a contest. Once the contest was announced, people from literally all over the world began to submit limericks, me among them. The votes were counted and three finalists were named. I was one. I got to correspond with Roger several times. We sent him pictures of ourselves to post with the final group of limericks and people voted again. I placed third, which was still fantastic to me. Roger had told us that he'd selected some items from his home as prizes. About a week later I received a framed print of a bird done by Edward Lear, who was also a renowned illustrator in addition to being the inventor of the limerick, and a small hard cover book of his poems and illustrations. The print had obviously been hanging somewhere in Roger's house and now it hangs in mine. I'm honored to have it.

After the contest was over I continued to be acquainted with him through membership in his Ebert Club and one year I went to Ebertfest in Champaign and got to watch a film with him and a few hundred other cool people in his hometown theater.

I wouldn't say we were friends, but we were friendly. He always said encouraging things about my writing and it meant more to me than any editor's or professor's comments ever did. I'll miss the hell out of him.

I realize that by posting this I will be identifiable to anyone who would go to the trouble of looking it up, but I don't care. I'm really farking sad.

I always read the Ebert review of every movie I watched...even when I didn't agree with him it was an entertaining read. There were some baffling reviews where he got plot points totally wrong...I figured his brain sometimes went to sleep after watching so many movies.

Abox:I always read the Ebert review of every movie I watched...even when I didn't agree with him it was an entertaining read. There were some baffling reviews where he got plot points totally wrong...I figured his brain sometimes went to sleep after watching so many movies.

I cut him some slack, particularly on genres he wasn't really into, because he would still make important notes about the filmcraft. Often disagreed with him on some point or another, but allows appreciated his viewpoints.

Knucklepopper:That was such a shocking bit of news; like finding out your fifth grade teacher died.But now I'm obsessed; what did Ebert say about Siskel's death in 1999? I can't find an obit him quoting anywhere.

This thread doesn't scrape the bottom of the barrel. This thread isn't the bottom of the barrel. This thread isn't below the bottom of the barrel. This thread doesn't deserve to be mentioned in the same sentence with barrels.

goddammitsomuch doesn't begin to cover it. When I was growing up in the NW 'Burbs late '70's/early '80's, the first thing my dad would ask when we asked to go to a movie was 'what does Siskel and Ebert think of it?"

Knucklepopper:That was such a shocking bit of news; like finding out your fifth grade teacher died.But now I'm obsessed; what did Ebert say about Siskel's death in 1999? I can't find an obit him quoting anywhere.

Here (in 3 parts) is the tribute episode of the syndicated program Ebert filmed the week after Siskel's death:

gunga galunga:dramboxf: gunga galunga: One of my favorites was one given to him by long forgotten comedian, Emo Philips, on how the two most difficult words to say in the english language are "yes" and "no". A foreign character, no matter how good his english is, will say "yes" and "no" in their native tongue.

Probably because "no" is "no" in many other languages. But the rule still applies (Nyett, nein, etc)

And some languages don't actually have words for "yes" and "no".

In Irish, for instance, you have to negate the verb from the question, so the answer to "Are you [...]?" isn't "yes" or "no", but "I am [...]" or "I am not [...]", and so on.

"Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen" is a horrible experience of unbearable length, briefly punctuated by three or four amusing moments. One of these involves a dog-like robot humping the leg of the heroine. Such are the meager joys. If you want to save yourself the ticket price, go into the kitchen, cue up a male choir singing the music of hell, and get a kid to start banging pots and pans together. Then close your eyes and use your imagination.

The plot is incomprehensible. The dialog of the Autobots®, Decepticons® and Otherbots® is meaningless word flap. Their accents are Brooklyese, British and hip-hop, as befits a race from the distant stars. Their appearance looks like junkyard throw-up. They are dumb as a rock. They share the film with human characters who are much more interesting, and that is very faint praise indeed.The human actors are in a witless sitcom part of the time, and lot of the rest of their time is spent running in slo-mo away from explosions, although--hello!--you can't outrun an explosion. They also make speeches like this one by John Turturro: "Oh, no! The machine is buried in the pyramid! If they turn it on, it will destroy the sun! Not on my watch!" The humans, including lots of U.S. troops, shoot at the Transformers a lot, although never in the history of science fiction has an alien been harmed by gunfire.

There are many great-looking babes in the film, who are made up to a flawless perfection and look just like real women, if you are a junior fanboy whose experience of the gender is limited to lad magazines. The two most inexplicable characters are Ron and Judy Witwicky (Kevin Dunn and Julie White), who are the parents of Shia LaBeouf, who Mephistopheles threw in to sweeten the deal. They take their son away to Princeton, apparently a party school, where Judy eats some pot and goes berserk. Later they swoop down out of the sky on Egypt, for reasons the movie doesn't make crystal clear, so they also can run in slo-mo from explosions.

The battle scenes are bewildering. A Bot makes no visual sense anyway, but two or three tangled up together create an incomprehensible confusion. I find it amusing that creatures that can unfold out of a Camaro and stand four stories high do most of their fighting with...fists. Like I say, dumber than a box of staples. They have tiny little heads, although Jetfire® must be made of older models, since he has an aluminum beard.

Sinbox:Knucklepopper: That was such a shocking bit of news; like finding out your fifth grade teacher died.But now I'm obsessed; what did Ebert say about Siskel's death in 1999? I can't find an obit him quoting anywhere.

Here (in 3 parts) is the tribute episode of the syndicated program Ebert filmed the week after Siskel's death:

This thread is probably dead by now, but i'm still feeling sad about his death, so I'll share my tiny csb. My wife touched on it upthread, but...

Back in the early 90s, before the world wide web was much more than an experimental overlay of the internet that a few of us geeks played with, I had a Compuserve account and, being a movie buff, I signed into the "Showbiz Media forum". I was happy to find a great group of people to talk about movies with. One of them posted with the name "Roger Ebert," and I assumed it was someone picking a funny name or, at best, an official moderator. I had had a few conversations with this person before I realized I was talking with the one and only.Over time, I became about as close to the forum folks as I was to anyone. Roger was very active in the early days, and got to be more scarce as he got busier, but he was always the heart of the group.

I had loads of conversations with him, mostly about movies, but also about cooking and restaurants and lots of other things. When he started doing the "Movie Answerman" column, I was quoted a few times, both questions and answers. For a while, those were the first things that would come up when you googled my name, which tickled me.

People in the forum argued passionately, including Roger, but we followed his example of arguing while still being nice to each other. I really liked his writing, I really admired his passion for and knowledge of film. but most of all, I knew him as a really good man. He was just as interested in being friends with nobodies like me as he was thecelebrities that he dealt with in his work. Probably more.

The thing that drew me to Roger's reviews was that I could usually tell be the way he wrote them whether I'd like a movie, regardless of whether or not he did. That's very rare; I've actually never run into that quality since. It's not a big surprise that he died, but it's a sad thing.